It is helpful to clarify and confirm that some of the agitation for 2MB is merely for the sake of "a test of Core team's willingness to listen" (wherein "listen" actually means "obey").
A contentious hard fork is not a "a small compromise" because it puts the entire system at risk of catastrophic consensus failure (and will almost certainly crash the price).
The 'you have to give me something because otherwise you're uncompromising and I will pout' negotiation tactic will not work on Bitcoin engineering decisions.
Our Honey Badger really does not care about hurt feelings from pushy token-demanding nobodies (of any nationality).
If Honey Badger starts negotiating and compromising simply to appease emotionally needy peoples' pleas for a pat on the head, the Bitcoin experiment ends in failure.
I hope this helps you understand why a 2MB increase is not as easy as throwing a bone to a barking dog.
A contentious hard fork is not a "a small compromise" because it puts the entire system at risk of catastrophic consensus failure (and will almost certainly crash the price).
The 'you have to give me something because otherwise you're uncompromising and I will pout' negotiation tactic will not work on Bitcoin engineering decisions.
Our Honey Badger really does not care about hurt feelings from pushy token-demanding nobodies (of any nationality).
If Honey Badger starts negotiating and compromising simply to appease emotionally needy peoples' pleas for a pat on the head, the Bitcoin experiment ends in failure.
I hope this helps you understand why a 2MB increase is not as easy as throwing a bone to a barking dog.
I thought that the core devs wanted to listen to "the community"? Now you are telling me that yes, they may condensed themselves but whatever you Chinese may have to say, it is of no consequence and should have zero effect on the outcome because we know better? Excuse my poor English but this strikes me as a bit condescending.
FYI, Eric, iCEBREAKER is not a core dev.
I see.
Actually, I think more people in China are coming to realise that they may have nobody to blame but themselves. And my company, HaoBTC, has been contemplating sponsoring a core developer recently.
What do you mean?
Some believe that the Chinese community's interest being underrepresented at the level of core development is much due to the fact that as a whole they have been myopically focusing on making money and not paying enough attention to protocol maintenance. As a result, they have almost no say and are little more than merely audience.
Sponsoring one or several developers sounds like a very good investment. I've noticed resentment towards the Chinese Bitcoin community for not contributing enough to development. There also seems to be a need for more communication channels between the Chinese Bitcoin community and the rest of the Bitcoin community. China is very important to Bitcoin and the lack of communication and understanding is creating friction where there doesn't need to be.
One common phenomenon is the conflation, in the minds of bitcoiners outside of China, of Chinese Bitcoin companies with the Chinese government. This is important, since the large majority of mining is located in China and Chinese pools are seen as a potential point of failure for Bitcoin as a decentralized system. The worry that the Chinese government could decide to interfere with Bitcoin, in a similar way as it interfered with Chinese exchanges in 2013/2014, needs to be addressed. And the initiative should come from the Chinese Bitcoin community. Making crucial Chinese business actors more visible in the community and seeing them engage with the community like you're doing now is one very important step. Another is to respect the unease among bitcoiners worldwide about the theoretical potential for Chinese government interference by taking some solid steps to improve the decentralization of Bitcoin mining by, in the short to medium term, sending hashing power to established and trusted non-chinese pools so that Chinese pools don't hold a majority; in the long term, create joint ventures outside of China and get more HW physically outside of Chinese jurisdiction. You and your Chinese colleagues might see other solutions, but it's important for the future of Bitcoin that it doesn't have to trust the "good will" of any nations government. Solving, or at least mitigating, this problem/worry would go a long way to further China's influence in the Bitcoin community. And with the potential for Bitcoin in China it would be a disservice to the entire Bitcoin community if China wasn't heard.
Best Regards
Beware: iCEBREAKER is a bully. His main goal is normally to disrupt dialogue.
